NATO “did not want to take risks” for the Poles!

♂

Jul 19, 11, 19:53 #1

NATO has declassified a number of documents that show it was not prepared to intervene militarily if the Soviet Union had invaded Poland during the period of Martial Law in the early 1980s.

The authoritarian People's Republic of Poland introduced Martial Law in December 13, 1981, in an attempt to quell anti-government opposition. Martial law ended in July 22, 1983. Many in the West feared that the Soviets would invade if the Polish government did not manage to put down the opposition.

NATO, however, had no plans to launch a counter-strike to repel a possible Soviet invasion.

Speaking on national television, Polish foreign minister Radosław Sikorski said of the documents' revelations that, NATO “did not want to take risks” for the Poles who fought for freedom.

NATO's rationale, according to Mr Sikorski, would have been that because it was (and is still is) just a defensive alliance, it did not have a mandate to intervene in the Soviet bloc's internal affairs.

http://www.wbj.pl/article-55400-nato-ruled-out-martial-law-interventio n.html?typ=ise

Interesting... seems like Nato was and still is pretty useless.

So what about that HQ in Brussel???? Its time for Europe to arm up and create a real alliance and not something ridiculous like this.

isthatu2Threads: 13 Posts: 5,225 Joined: Apr 3, 08 ♂	Jul 19, 11, 19:58 #2
Why should it have? Poland was in the erm, WARSAW PACT.....the clue for us was kinda in the name.................why risk WW3 for an internal security matter behind the iron Curtain?

legendThreads: 9 Posts: 819 Joined: Apr 23, 11 ♂	Jul 19, 11, 20:01 #3
David_18: Interesting... seems like Nato was and still is pretty useless. Amen. Unless of course its bashing weaker countries and carpet bombing third world countries to hell.

isthatu2Threads: 13 Posts: 5,225 Joined: Apr 3, 08 ♂	Jul 19, 11, 20:02 #4
Again,simple bloody question..Why would NATO have gone to war to help an enemy country?

EdWilczynskiThreads: 3 Posts: 163 Joined: Jun 6, 11 ♂	Jul 19, 11, 20:50 #5
isthatu2: simple bloody question..Why would NATO have gone to war to help an enemy country? Why would you get a reasoned response from someone who clearly has a chip on his shoulder. He is the Polish version of Ali G...... Is it because I is Polish?????

HarryThreads: 62 Posts: 8,508 Joined: May 2, 07 ♂ [Suspended]	Jul 19, 11, 20:52 #6
EdWilczynski: Is it because I is Polish????? No, it is because he is an utter cock.

Grzegorz_Threads: 81 Posts: 6,213 Joined: Nov 16, 06 ♂	Jul 19, 11, 20:56 #7
isthatu2: NATO Why does it bomb Libya ?

♂

Jul 19, 11, 20:57 #8

NATO is all for individuals or groups who keep open the possibility for those to give themselves a renewed sense of purpose somewhere down the line. To even believe that it invited Poland in to safeguard its vested interests to the hilt is pure fantasy. I don't think some realise the scale of NATO operations and just how many personnel are involved. Job creation is huge.

Collective banding together is all very well, e.g UN Genocide Convention. However, sticking to those principles is quite sth else. So long as the prevailing political factions of the day are proponents and exponents of that which they espouse then there is but only one outcome. Poland can only pray that a repeat of the past doesn't occur. Best stay optimistic!

♂

Jul 19, 11, 21:21 #9

David_18:

NATO has declassified a number of documents that show it was not prepared to intervene militarily if the Soviet Union had invaded Poland during the period of Martial Law in the early 1980s.

The authoritarian People's Republic of Poland introduced Martial Law in December 13, 1981, in an attempt to quell anti-government opposition. Martial law ended in July 22, 1983. Many in the West feared that the Soviets would invade if the Polish government did not manage to put down the opposition.

NATO, however, had no plans to launch a counter-strike to repel a possible Soviet invasion.

Speaking on national television, Polish foreign minister Radosław Sikorski said of the documents' revelations that, NATO “did not want to take risks” for the Poles who fought for freedom.

NATO's rationale, according to Mr Sikorski, would have been that because it was (and is still is) just a defensive alliance, it did not have a mandate to intervene in the Soviet bloc's internal affairs.

Interesting... seems like Nato was and still is pretty useless.

So what about that HQ in Brussel???? Its time for Europe to arm up and create a real alliance and not something ridiculous like this.

Those were different times back then. I don't know if its fair to expect NATO to help Poland when it was in the Warsaw Bloc pact.

But today its a different story.

Hopefully things will remain relatively stable in Poland's region today.

Monia	Jul 20, 11, 11:12 #10
legend: Unless of course its bashing weaker countries and carpet bombing third world countries to hell. Do you mean Nato invasion of Libya now or Yugoslavia back in the 90-ies ? Yeah, Russians were stronger .

PennBoyThreads: 157 Posts: 3,443 Joined: Dec 7, 08 ♂	Jul 20, 11, 17:25 #11
David_18: NATO “did not want to take risks” for the Poles! There's a shocker, not the first time that Poland was left behind. isthatu2: Why should it have? Poland was in the erm, WARSAW PACT Yes everyone knew Poland was forced into it by the occupying Soviet Forces and falsely in power, communist party.

peterwegThreads: 35 Posts: 1,997 Joined: Feb 16, 07 ♂	Edited by: peterweg Jul 20, 11, 20:05 #12
PennBoy: Yes everyone knew Poland was forced into it by the occupying Soviet Forces and falsely in power, communist party. Who knew the Poles were forced into anything? The Warsaw pact forces were seen as a unified enemy who would fight together against Nato, there was no indication they would not. Didn't the Poles take part with the invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia?

MEMBER ♂

Edited by: Torq Jul 20, 11, 20:20 #13

peterweg:

Didn't the Poles take part with the invasion of Hungary

No, we didn't. Moreover, in 1956, about 30% of all the aid given to Hungary by countries of the World
came from Poland (a country that was still rising from unthinkable war destruction) - 2 million dollars
(with the USA giving 1 million, and all the other countries about 3.5 million dollars). In the period of
20 days - one milion Polish zlotys a day was raised, with the average monthly wage at that time being
800-1000 zlotys. Also, transports with medicines, medical supplies and blood were sent.

peterweg:

and Czechoslovakia?

Yes, we did. It was a shame and disgrace.

JonnyMThreads: 16 Posts: 4,487 Joined: Mar 9, 11 ♂	Edited by: JonnyM Jul 20, 11, 20:22 #14
peterweg: Didn't the Poles take part with the invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia? Poles took part in the invasion of brave little Czechoslovakia. Twice.

PolskiMocThreads: 7 Posts: 488 Joined: Mar 15, 10 ♂ [Suspended]	Jul 20, 11, 21:01 #15
Well of course. Some of the largest & earliest nations in NATO helped to expand the Soviets.

♂

Jul 20, 11, 21:10 #16

peterweg:

Who knew the Poles were forced into anything? The Warsaw pact forces were seen as a unified enemy who would fight together against Nato, there was no indication they would not. Didn't the Poles take part with the invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia?

WHO KNEW the Poles were forced into anything??

Yes Moscow never put a gun to the head of Poland and other "Warsaw pact" countries. LOL

Good God you have to be kidding.

Yes Soviet soldiers placed in Poland were put there because Poles were never forced into anything. LOL

JonnyMThreads: 16 Posts: 4,487 Joined: Mar 9, 11 ♂	Jul 20, 11, 21:27 #17
MediaWatch: Yes Soviet soldiers placed in Poland were put there because Poles were never forced into anything Does that mean you think that NATO should have ignored the fact that Poland was in the Warsaw Pact?

Grzegorz_Threads: 81 Posts: 6,213 Joined: Nov 16, 06 ♂	Edited by: Grzegorz_ Jul 20, 11, 21:36 #18
Harry: Such a pity that some Poles collaborated with the communist regime Because It's obvious for everyone that If there hadn't been any, Poland would have been a free, democratic country, member of NATO etc. Right, teacher ? Harry: I'm fed up with having insults, racial abuse and threats sent my way. Which insults ? It's pure truth.

♂

Jul 20, 11, 22:13 #19

delphiandomine:

My impression of history is that Poland's military leadership was seen as very pro-Moscow - even though we now know that it wasn't entirely so.

Quite the opposite. During the 1956 Poznan uprising the Polish admiral made it quite clear that any Soviet Navy ships entering Polish territorial waters would be fired on, one of the commanders of a Bomber squadron (I believe it was in Wielkopolska) said if the Soviet tanks got too close to Warsaw they'd get bombed. Poland was actually the least loyal Eastern bloc state, Bulgaria being the most.

♂ [Suspended]

Edited by: delphiandomine Jul 20, 11, 22:18 #20

PennBoy:

Quite the opposite. During the 1956 Poznan uprising the Polish admiral made it quite clear that any Soviet Navy ships entering Polish territorial waters would be fired on, one of the commanders of a Bomber squadron (I believe it was in Wielkopolska) said if the Soviet tanks got too close to Warsaw they'd get bombed. Poland was actually the least loyal Eastern bloc state, Bulgaria being the most.

Yep, there's more too - I don't remember the specifics, but there was at least one other case where one of the General Secretaries made it clear to Moscow that the Polish Army would resist any occupation. I can't help but wonder if that's why the Soviets were so reluctant to get involved in 1980-1 - if Jaruzelski had been deposed, they wouldn't have wanted to get into a fight with Poland when they were already involved in a rather nasty war in Afghanistan.

It would be terribly interesting to read about things from the Soviet perspective, but those documents will probably never see the light of day:(

HarryThreads: 62 Posts: 8,508 Joined: May 2, 07 ♂ [Suspended]	Jul 20, 11, 22:21 #21
PennBoy: Poland was actually the least loyal Eastern bloc state, Bulgaria being the most. This is the same Poland which took part in the 1968 invasion of Czechsolvakia? The one which other eastern bloc countries refused to take part in? But still you claim that Poland was the least loyal. What did I say you need to do with your head?

delphiandomineThreads: 42 Posts: 9,954 Joined: Nov 25, 08 ♂ [Suspended]	Edited by: delphiandomine Jul 20, 11, 22:26 #22
Harry: But still you claim that Poland was the least loyal. It seems to me that as Jaruzelski rose up through the ranks, Poland fell more and more into line. He was, after all, Moscow's man from the beginning - so it does stand to reason that Poland became more "loyal" as time went on. Certainly by 1968, with him as the Minister of Defence - they were far more loyal than in the mid 50's.

HarryThreads: 62 Posts: 8,508 Joined: May 2, 07 ♂ [Suspended]	Jul 20, 11, 22:45 #23
delphiandomine: He was, after all, Moscow's man from the beginning Which explains why they sent him to Siberia and permanently disabled him.

delphiandomineThreads: 42 Posts: 9,954 Joined: Nov 25, 08 ♂ [Suspended]	Jul 20, 11, 22:48 #24
Harry: Which explains why they sent him to Siberia and permanently disabled him. Strange, isn't it? He's never (to my knowledge) spoken about how he went from being a gentrified Catholic schoolboy to orphaned forced labourer, only to end up getting selected for Soviet officer training.

♂

Jul 20, 11, 22:53 #25

Harry:

This is the same Poland which took part in the 1968 invasion of Czechsolvakia? The one which other eastern bloc countries refused to take part in? But still you claim that Poland was the least loyal.

Wow one thing, let's not forget that a few top commies could have made decisions that the rest of the party and whole population did not agree with. Jaruzelski said we're going in, we're going in. This wasn't a democracy more like a dictatorship. How many 1956, 1970, 1981 unrests did Bulgaria have? none.

HarryThreads: 62 Posts: 8,508 Joined: May 2, 07 ♂ [Suspended]	Jul 20, 11, 23:02 #26
delphiandomine: He's never (to my knowledge) spoken about how he went from being a gentrified Catholic schoolboy to orphaned forced labourer, only to end up getting selected for Soviet officer training. Rather similar to the son of an enemy of the people being selected as the luckiest child actor in Poland and then not getting interned when all other Solidarnosc activists were.

♂ [Suspended]

Edited by: delphiandomine Jul 20, 11, 23:17 #27

PennBoy:

Wow one thing, let's not forget that a few top commies could have made decisions that the rest of the party and whole population did not agree with. Jaruzelski said we're going in, we're going in.

To be fair - the nomeklatura system had a lot to do with this. They could've never made decisions that the rank-and-file didn't support - although the rank-and-file also had a damned good reason not to object.

While they had no part in the decision-making (and Jaruzelski, who would've gained his power from the Soviets wouldn't have objected) - they certainly had good reasons to support the invasion. Don't forget that unlike the Hungarians, the Poles weren't particularly on good terms with the Czechoslovaks.

I've said it thousands of times - the system could never have worked in Poland without the acceptance of a significant minority of Poles.

Harry:

Rather similar to the son of an enemy of the people being selected as the luckiest child actor in Poland and then not getting interned when all other Solidarnosc activists were.

Very strange that, too. What's even stranger is that the other son was interned and then released rather quickly.

MediaWatchThreads: 31 Posts: 1,305 Joined: Aug 30, 08 ♂	Jul 20, 11, 23:29 #28
delphiandomine: I've said it thousands of times - the system could never have worked in Poland without the acceptance of a significant minority of Poles. Couldn't have been a significant minority since the system barely worked and then crumbled.

SeanusThreads: 22 Posts: 30,158 Joined: Dec 25, 07 ♂	Jul 20, 11, 23:48 #29
This is all before Poland's accession to NATO in 1999, Mods. I understand the need for background if it is leading to sth but this is just endless wittering on about Jarużelski. Nothing about the thread title.

♂ [Suspended]

Jul 21, 11, 01:10 #30

MediaWatch:

Couldn't have been a significant minority since the system barely worked and then crumbled.

The system actually worked quite well - it's a stereotypical view in the West that the Communist Bloc "didn't work". And don't forget - the security forces were all loyal to the Party - in 1980/1, when people were leaving the Party in droves - barely any resigned from the security apparatus.

Seanus:

but this is just endless wittering on about Jarużelski.

Well - Jaruzelski was undeniably the power man during this period.

POLAND . The Unofficial Guide	Unanswered \| Archives
POLAND . The Unofficial Guide	"Polska" means "Poland" in Polish!	Witamy, Guest \| PF Members \| Gold Members

Home \| Unanswered \| Archives \| Random \| Statistics	Time in Poland: 20:12 / May 26
About Us \| Contact Us \| Rules, Privacy \| Poland Advertising	© 2005-12 PolishForums.com